385 S.W.3d 902
Ark. Ct. App.2011Background
- Appellee Mary D. Smith, as trustee of the L. Sanford Smith Testamentary Trust, filed 2008 suit to quiet title to 27.5 acres described as W 1/2 NE 1/4 in Section 19, T2S R3W, Phillips County, north of Beaver Bayou Drainage Canal.
- Appellee claimed color of title and adverse possession since 1954 for the homestead property adjacent to the subject property and asserted color of title to the subject property since Sanford Smith obtained it in 1954; published tax payments purportedly continued through 2008.
- Appellant Charlie Smith challenged the claim, contending ownership via a 1964 warranty deed and long-term color of title, with acts such as placing survey flags, seedlings, and fence posts on the land.
- First Bank of the Delta was joined as a mortgagee; the trial court granted a TRO and later denied summary judgment, and the case proceeded to a May 2010 hearing with extensive testimony and documentary evidence.
- The trial court found appellee and her predecessors possessed the homestead since 1954 and that appellant knew Sanford Smith farmed the land since 1966 but took no action until after 2004, concluding appellee’s ownership by adverse possession vested by 1973.
- The court quieted title in appellee, dismissed appellant’s counterclaim and First Bank, and later corrected a scrivener’s error in the decree describing the property as Township 2S, Range 3W instead of Range 3E.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did appellee prove adverse possession of the subject property? | Smith, via color of title and long possession, satisfied elements. | Smith did not prove taxes on contiguous property or other statutory requirements. | Yes; appellee proved adverse possession and title quieted. |
| Whether the 1995 color-of-title/tax requirements apply to this claim. | Claim vested by 1973; pre-1995 law applies; no need to satisfy 1995 elements. | Should be subject to new statutory requirements if vesting occurred after 1995. | Pre-1995 vesting controls; additional 1995 elements not required. |
| May appellant tack the adverse-possession period from a predecessor in title? | Tacking permitted; appellee inherited through Sanford Smith as immediate predecessor. | Tacking not applicable or improperly evidenced. | Tacking permitted; appellee’s claim vests prior to 1995. |
| Is the decree’s legal description of the subject property accurate? | Description should be correct and consistent with the deed history. | No substantive dispute on description in the record. | Decree modified to correct scrivener’s error: Range should be East, not West. |
Key Cases Cited
- Emerson v. Linkinogger, 382 S.W.3d 806 (Ark. App. 2011) (de novo review of factual findings in quiet-title actions)
- Schrader v. Schrader, 101 S.W.3d 873 (Ark. App. 2003) (pre-1995 vesting allows reliance on common-law elements)
- Barnett v. Gomance, 377 S.W.3d 317 (Ark. App. 2010) (tacking of adverse-possession time from immediate predecessor authorized)
- White River Levee Dist. v. Reidhar, 61 S.W.3d 235 (Ark. App. 2001) (common-law elements of adverse possession and possession characteristics)